Voter fraud: What's the real reason behind the GOP's efforts?

• stlouiedipalma

  An interesting study of voter fraud appears to debunk the GOP's claim (shared by many righties on the OC) that voter fraud is rampant and that voter I.D. laws need to be implemented in order to stem the tide of illegal voting in this country.
  
  Why do Republicans want to make it harder for people to vote? Do you think, as I do, that they can't sway voters on their message and must reduce the numbers of potential Democratic voters? Your opinions please. I know many of you will use all the old tired excuses, but please tell me why they want voting to be restricted (and by extension, suppressed)?
  
  http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/08/11/13236464-new-database-of-us-voter-fraud-finds-no-evidence-that-photo-id-laws-are-needed
• jhay78

  

  A photo ID is needed for, among many other things:
  
  - getting on an airplane
  - buying alcohol
  - qualify for welfare, food stamps, and public housing (all used primarily by poor people- the ID is required by the government to eliminate fraud)
  - obtaining a PO Box
  
  Why is it so controversial to require one to vote? And no, there doesn't need to be evidence of massive voter fraud to justify needing a photo ID- there only needs to be the potential, thus the need for one for government programs for the poor.
  
  And why will photo ID laws only adversely affect Democrats? Are we admitting that they, more so than Republicans, are too inept or lazy to obtain the required identification, or is it really because they don't want to disenfranchise dead people, illegals, and cartoon characters?
• stlouiedipalma

  Sorry, but you only rehashed the right-wing talking points, just like I expected.
  
  I'll ask you once again: If there's no evidence of voter fraud, why do you insist on making it harder to vote? Your argument about potential is laughable. If that were true, why not ban all guns because of the potential that I might use one to kill someone?
  
  Read the article I linked. It's obvious you had a knee-jerk reaction to the hot button topic and didn't bother. The article explains that, even though dead people were registered, no one tried to vote using the dead person's name. Same for Mickey Mouse.
  
  Sure, I'll agree that there have been cases of welfare fraud, and I'll even agree that I.D.'s might help prevent it. Unfortunately for those of you who want to hide your desire for voter suppression behind flimsy excuses, there is simply no evidence of rampant voter fraud.
• Glory Days

  

  stlouiedipalma;1245086 wrote:An interesting study of voter fraud appears to debunk the GOP's claim (shared by many righties on the OC) that voter fraud is rampant and that voter I.D. laws need to be implemented in order to stem the tide of illegal voting in this country.

  I will see if i can find it, but wasnt there a study that debunked the Democrat's claim that requiring voter ID kept voters away from the polls? i think it was like in places where new voter ID laws were passed, there was actually an increase in voter turn out among minorities.
  

  stlouiedipalma;1245110 wrote:
  Read the article I linked. It's obvious you had a knee-jerk reaction to the hot button topic and didn't bother. The article explains that, even though dead people were registered, no one tried to vote using the dead person's name. Same for Mickey Mouse.

  is primary information used for anything, like redistricting or anything?
• Glory Days

  

  http://www.brennancenter.org/page/-/Democracy/VRE/Mycoff%20et%20al.pdf
  
  here is one. it didnt show an increase, but showed basically no change in turn out. it also showed the main reason people didnt vote is because they were lazy or dont care, not because they couldnt vote.
• Cleveland Buck

  

  Another major issue that needs discussion instead of the nation's pending bankruptcy. They got you again. All of our masters cheat if someone comes along to put their power in jeopardy, but in a general election between two of their own puppets, there is no need to cheat, they already won.
• elitesmithie05

  I dont understand why Democrats are afraid of people needing an ID to vote...(they are free in states where its required to have one btw)
• gut

  elitesmithie05;1245340 wrote:I dont understand why Democrats are afraid of people needing an ID to vote...(they are free in states where its required to have one btw)

  1) They tend to get the vast majority of illegal (and dead) voters
  
  2) Never pass-up an opportunity to accuse the Repubs of being racist
  
  3) Never pass-up an opportunity to distract from real issues.
• bigdaddy2003

  

  gut;1245345 wrote:1) They tend to get the vast majority of illegal (and dead) voters
  
  2) Never pass-up an opportunity to accuse the Repubs of being racist
  
  3) Never pass-up an opportunity to distract from real issues.

  This.
• jhay78

  

  stlouiedipalma;1245110 wrote:Sorry, but you only rehashed the right-wing talking points, just like I expected.
  
  I'll ask you once again: If there's no evidence of voter fraud, why do you insist on making it harder to vote? Your argument about potential is laughable. If that were true, why not ban all guns because of the potential that I might use one to kill someone?

  I never said there was no evidence, just that there doesn't need to be any. I mean, if there really is no evidence, why do people even have to register in the first place? Just let anyone and everyone pull the lever in the polling place and trust that they are all real citizens over the age of 18, etc., and that all of them will only vote once.
  
  The argument about potential fraud is relevant. It's no different than a business locking its doors at night, even though there's no evidence of rampant crime and break-ins in their locality. The potential of theft and looting is enough to make them take precautions to avoid such a scenario.
  
  And by the way, the Supreme Court ruled in 2008 that photo ID's are not unconstitutional (no less than a 6-3 majority):
  
  http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/29/washington/28cnd-scotus.html
  
  Even more recently, the Ninth Circus even said states can require certain forms of ID before voting:
  
  http://standwitharizona.com/blog/2012/04/17/breaking-federal-appeals-court-upholds-most-of-arizona-voter-id-law/
  
  So your argument really doesn't have much of a leg to stand on.
• tk421

  

  I've got the perfect solution, require SS# to vote. 1 SS#/1 vote. Every single American has a SS#, it is not the same as a photo ID. Perfect solution. You can even do it online, just like filing your taxes. How would requiring a valid SS# to cast your vote disenfranchise anyone?
  
  And for anyone who says, but what about someone stealing your SS#, what is stopping someone from going to a polling place that doesn't require ID and taking any name listed and casting a vote. All you need to do is fake a signature. I don't understand the grief about requiring an ID. Voting is supposed to be the most important thing that a citizen does, yet Democrats don't want to make sure the voting process is secure and only legal citizens vote.
• sleeper

  

  ID to vote. Simple.
• WebFire

  Seems simple to me. What exactly is the opposing argument?
• BoatShoes

  WebFire;1245594 wrote:Seems simple to me. What exactly is the opposing argument?

  The argument is that if it was just an ID requirement and some money was appropriated to help ensure that people without ID's got them then it may be reasonable even though there is no evidence that are voting process is insecure. However, that is not the case with these laws being passed. For instance, college I.D.'s aren't adequate photo identification but a hunting license is valid identification? Why...because college kids are stupid liberals and hunters are conservatives.
  
  I actually like tk41's proposal.
  
  These laws are not being passed to secure our voting process. They're being passed to make it easier for Republicans to vote and harder for liberals with the hope that this slight nudge will swing the election Republicans and finally free us from the marxists.
• bigdaddy2003

  

  I heard a liberal leaning person say the other day that IDs are too expensive for some people. Well I had to do some research and I found out that they are under 30 bucks in every state and free in most to senior citizens. Hm.
• gut

  BoatShoes;1245656 wrote: For instance, college I.D.'s aren't adequate photo identification but a hunting license is valid identification? Why...because college kids are stupid liberals and hunters are conservatives.
  .

  Or maybe it's because a hunting license is issued by a govt agency and college id's, well, aren't... among other issues.
  
  Next you'll tell me they approve a D/L because poor people (who vote mostly Dem, at least in most regions) are less likely to own a car.
• tcarrier32

  

  WebFire;1245594 wrote:Seems simple to me. What exactly is the opposing argument?

  shouldn't cost money to vote. you can argue about the relative cost all you want, but in most places it costs money to have a photo i.d. made.
  
  there needs to be some way to i.d. people at polls, to ensure they are citizens who hold the right to vote. fuck me if I know how to do that for free, though.
• sleeper

  

  tcarrier32;1245675 wrote:shouldn't cost money to vote. you can argue about the relative cost all you want, but in most places it costs money to have a photo i.d. made.
  
  there needs to be some way to i.d. people at polls, to ensure they are citizens who hold the right to vote. fuck me if I know how to do that for free, though.

  Most states give free IDs(among everything else) to poor people. Keep in mind, these poor people have the latest smartphone, drive a 2010 Lexus, eat steak every meal, wear designer clothing, and can't help but have the freshest hair cut on at all times. I think they can throw $20 or so for an ID, but nevertheless I wouldn't mind paying a small increase in taxes in order to pay for an ID for those who cannot afford it.
• bases_loaded

  

  Why is requiring proof that you are who you say you are not important to liberals?
• sleeper

  

  bases_loaded;1245693 wrote:Why is requiring proof that you are who you say you are not important to liberals?

  Because most poor stupid unemployed uneducated people vote Dem and they are too busy sitting around on their ass all day applying to Wall Street jobs with a GED, so they can meet their quota of job applications to keep receiving money from the government, to go get their FREE ID.
• WebFire

  tcarrier32;1245675 wrote:shouldn't cost money to vote. you can argue about the relative cost all you want, but in most places it costs money to have a photo i.d. made.
  
  there needs to be some way to i.d. people at polls, to ensure they are citizens who hold the right to vote. fuck me if I know how to do that for free, though.

  So you are disputing that the states requiring IDs do not provide IDs for free?
• WebFire

  In Ohio, an ID card costs $8.50. I do agree that if it required to vote, it should be free to obtain. Otherwise, I am in favor of requiring ID.
• sleeper

  

  WebFire;1245709 wrote:So you are disputing that the states requiring IDs do not provide IDs for free?

  No? I said most states give free IDs to poor people.
• WebFire

  sleeper;1245715 wrote:No? I said most states give free IDs to poor people.

  Sorry, I quote the wrong person.
• elitesmithie05

  WebFire;1245712 wrote:In Ohio, an ID card costs $8.50. I do agree that if it required to vote, it should be free to obtain. Otherwise, I am in favor of requiring ID.

  Its free in Texas where its required.(for voting purposes)